Language Barriers and NJ Insurance Statements — Asserting Your Right to a Qualified Interpreter

PERSONAL INJURY LAW · SONG LAW FIRM COLUMN

## Situation

Many Korean and other immigrant drivers in New Jersey are caught off guard when, days after a crash, the opposing driver's insurance adjuster calls with a polite request: "Just a quick call to confirm the facts." Within minutes, the adjuster begins a recorded statement. When your English is limited, a stream of yes/no answers can lock in a distorted version of how the collision happened, how badly you were hurt, and whether you accepted any share of fault. Statements "interpreted" by a bilingual child, cousin, or the adjuster's own bilingual staff member are especially difficult to unwind later. What feels like a helpful shortcut in the moment often becomes the single most damaging piece of evidence in your case, quoted back to you months later during negotiations or in a deposition transcript.

## Legal Concept

The right to a qualified interpreter is not a courtesy — it is a procedural right grounded in federal and state law. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids recipients of federal funding, including state courts, from discriminating on the basis of national origin, which the Department of Justice interprets to include language. Executive Order 13166 requires federally funded entities to provide meaningful access to Limited English Proficient (LEP) individuals. New Jersey's Court Rule 1:12 governs the appointment of certified or qualified interpreters in court proceedings, and the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) Language Services Section maintains a roster of court-certified Korean interpreters. Although Miranda warnings apply to criminal custody, the underlying principle — a statement made without genuine comprehension carries little evidentiary weight — informs how judges and arbitrators evaluate civil recorded statements taken from LEP claimants, especially in New Jersey's PIP arbitration and UM/UIM contexts.

## NJ Rules

The New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance has issued bulletins reminding insurers to provide language access to LEP consumers throughout the claims process, from first notice of loss through settlement. N.J.A.C. 11:2-17, New Jersey's Unfair Claims Settlement Practices regulation, prohibits carriers from misrepresenting facts or exerting undue pressure on claimants; a recorded statement obtained after an LEP claimant asked for an interpreter and was refused can be challenged under this framework as an unfair practice. For depositions, N.J. Court Rule 4:14-9 requires that any interpreter be sworn and qualified on the record, that objections about translation accuracy be preserved contemporaneously, and that the interpreter be neutral, not affiliated with either party or its insurer.

## Practical Response

First, if an adjuster calls asking for a recorded statement, say clearly: "My English is limited. I will not give a statement without a qualified Korean interpreter." Then end the call. Second, insist on a certified or court-qualified interpreter — never a family member, friend, bilingual coworker, or the carrier's own bilingual employee, all of whom have real or apparent conflicts of interest. Third, before any statement, have counsel obtain the topic list or written questions in advance and review your rights with you in your own language. Fourth, in deposition, the interpreter must be sworn on the record; if you sense a mistranslation, stop and object immediately so the issue is preserved for later challenge. Fifth, if you have already given a statement through an unqualified interpreter, an errata sheet, sworn correction, or supplemental statement — supported by evidence of your LEP status — can be used to challenge or clarify the record.

## Common Misunderstandings

"My child translated, so it counts." AOC guidance and federal LEP policy both consider minor children inappropriate interpreters because of confidentiality, developmental, and accuracy concerns. "The adjuster said I must give a recorded statement." You generally owe cooperation to your own (first-party) insurer, but not to the opposing (third-party) carrier. "I already signed something, so it's over." Statements produced without a qualified interpreter can still be attacked for reliability, and courts routinely permit correction where LEP status and translation gaps are documented on the record.

## Key Takeaways

A language barrier is not a weakness in your case — it is a trigger for procedural protections designed to level the playing field for Korean, Chinese, Spanish, and other LEP claimants in New Jersey. Asserting your right to a certified interpreter is lawful and appropriate at every stage: the adjuster's first call, an examination under oath, mediation, arbitration, and deposition. Statements obtained without proper interpretation can be excluded, reinterpreted, or given reduced weight by a judge or arbitrator. The safest rule is simple: no qualified interpreter, no statement, and every objection made on the record while the transcript is still open.

## FAQ

**Q1. The other driver's adjuster keeps calling for a recorded statement. Do I have to comply?**

A. Generally no. You owe cooperation to your own carrier, not to the opposing third-party insurer. Politely decline and route all further communication in writing through counsel.

**Q2. I already gave a recorded statement in broken English. Is it too late?**

A. Not necessarily. If you can document your LEP status, the absence of a qualified interpreter, and specific misunderstandings, the statement's weight and admissibility can be challenged, and supplemental corrections can be placed on the record.

**Q3. Who chooses the deposition interpreter?**

A. Parties typically confer and select from the AOC roster of certified interpreters. Objections to translation accuracy must be raised on the record contemporaneously to be preserved.

**Q4. The insurer offered its own bilingual staff member to translate. Is that acceptable?**

A. No. That person has an inherent conflict of interest. Insist on a neutral, court-certified or qualified interpreter.